Skip to main content

tv   Road to the White House  CSPAN  August 7, 2011 9:30pm-11:00pm EDT

9:30 pm
19 years old. 18 years old from urstan. 16 years old. 17 years from stanga. 17 years old. 18 years old from bregin. 17 years old from tromtin. 30 years old from tromtin. 14 years of age from mondrol.
9:31 pm
19 years old. 18 years old from south sporg. 17 years old. 15 years old. 16 years old from sungtan. 18 years old. 43 years old. 21 years old from vatican. 17 years old from borderl.
9:32 pm
15 years old from franala. 16 years old. 17 years old. 15 years old from tunsberg. 17 years old from oslo. 17 years old. 16 years old from halden. 45 years from halden. 21 years of age from oslo. 18 years and from oslo.
9:33 pm
18 years old from oslo. 18 years old. 21 years of age from oslo. 16 years of age from fredriksber. 17 years of age. 20 years old. 18 years of age from oslo. 18 years old. 16 years of age alta.
9:34 pm
17 years old from fredriksog. 18 years old from oslo. 16 years old from oslo. 18 years old from oslo. 18 years old from barden. 32 years of age from oslo. 34 years of age from oslo. 30 years old from oslo. i wish peace on the deceased and ask for one minute of silence.
9:35 pm
>> thank you.
9:36 pm
♪ ♪
9:37 pm
9:38 pm
♪ ♪
9:39 pm
9:40 pm
♪ ♪
9:41 pm
9:42 pm
>> next national review editor, rich lowry, speaks at the young american foundation student conference. and next alyona minkovski and then the norwegian memorial service. tomorrow the amendment foundation holds a guns on college campuses, allowing their opinions about allowing concealed guns on campuses. coverage live monday at noon on c-span-3. rich lowry talked about abraham
9:43 pm
lincoln and how the founding fathers influenced him and how they can be found at the political party. this is about 1:10. >> good evening ladies and gentlemen. for those on site, and you noticed but for others joining us, the young american foundations is an outreach group that supplies college activists with the tools, and resources and the knowledge they need on comp campuses, and we have saved reagan's materials to teach his
9:44 pm
ideas. we have enjoyed the banquet and we have enjoyed buckley, a godfather of the entire unit. but he founded and is editor of the national review. and that position of editor he held until 1990. and for every 10 years that same position is held by this evening's speaker and he's a best-selling author and i saw him when he filled in on fox news, and he was on hannity when he was on the same show as that other guy. and he did a fantastic job, and not just an athletic type or one
9:45 pm
of the sarcastic types that could rile people up but had everything, he was effective at what he did. he continues to serve as a guest on the fox news channel and a graduate of the university of virginia. and while there he was an a activist and joy me in welcoming mr. rich lowry. >> thank you.
9:46 pm
it's a real pleasure to be with you tonight. and i am scincinnatsin -- since sentiment and it doesn't happen often and considering the national review in new york city. for the longest time our office was ahead of the headquarters of rap studio, called loud records, it was appropriately named. and an important part juxtaposition and this odor came and i regret to report that in a lot of days national news was produced in the haze of marijuana smoke. i am glad to see we have fans in the audience of marijuana.
9:47 pm
i know all of you are probably a little frustrated that republicans have taken over washington and we haven't seen enough change. but i assure you this is a different place. every time i came to washington in that period, i was reminded of the famous winston churchill story, when he was in opposition to the labour government in britain. and the story was he went to the men's room and standing at one of these big-trough style urinals, guys if you have been to wrigley field, one of those. and the leader came next to him and churchill got as far away as he could. he was netsdzi inin ining -- n today but he said no, i know
9:48 pm
when i see something large and strange i want to nationalize it. and that's how it went for years, and now its stopped and may not be all we want but it's something. i want to talk to you tonight about abraham lincoln and why the republican party should be the party of lincoln. why do i want to talk about lincoln? well, one it's been a long week and i assume you have heard enough about barack and michelle and nancy, and two, i am working on a book on lincoln. so i am absorbed in him and three, i think it's a fascinating period. we had amazing power but a
9:49 pm
country with still a personal feel. on new year's day when lincoln presented the proclamation commission and when he got there, the door was locked and he lifts the window and finds abraham in a study. you would be shot 10 different time if you tried this today. let me go on 20 minutes about lincoln. and then tease out first and second principles and do q & a and relive the civil war or talk about what you like. let me get a barometer in the room about lincoln. how many of you consider yourself real lincoln fans? ok, that's good, two-thirds or three-quarters. how many of lincoln skeptics?
9:50 pm
ok, we have a few. how many southerns in the room? we have a lot. how many folks from south carolina? one south carolinians, two. do you live in the vicinity of fort sumpter? you may want to consider leaving the room. just kidding. first let's talk about lincoln personally, a prelude. he had an incredible upbringing. we heard about the log cabin and it wasn't a myth. but it exagerated the way he grew up. when his family move from kentucky to indiana, they had a three-sided cabin and didn't build that until they had
9:51 pm
cleared enough rooms to get the material for a log cabin. there was a neighbor miles away and remembered in her cabin through the links in the logs, they could see the glowing eyes of wolves. this was the real frontier, it was characterized by drunkenness and ignorance. there was those who thought that lincoln did not meet a preacher until he was a young adult. had one year of formal schooling, it was self-educated and had to go out of his way to get self-educated. there is a story that he walked six miles to get english grammar book. when he was a boy his mother and
9:52 pm
aunt and uncle died at the same time of milk sick. that sounds cute and charming now. but what it was, the cows would eat a poison weed and you drink the milk and your skin would turn black and nauseous and die in days. are we serving milmilk? ok, don't be sweemish. and his first love died. and in the white house his son, willie, died. he was the son most like abraham lincoln, a very bright kid. beloved by both parents. it drove mary halfway mad and have saiances to have contact.
9:53 pm
and lincoln played around with it, and said that the spiritualist remind him his cabinet. because of their views. he had an odd appearance. 6'4". every time you see lincoln described, someone meeting him. as a young man, they said that his trousers didn't reach his shoes. he was walking around with extreme high-waters all the time. when he gave the speech in new york, and introduced him to the elite. and he was sitting down on the stage, and when he stood up, people gasped because they never had seen someone that tall. and he was considering an ugly man, and he said once that god must love common looking people because he made more of them.
9:54 pm
and we like to flatter ourselves saying lincoln's greatness was attached to the men and people. he was a brilliant man. touched by genius, as a kid and heard something he didn't understand. he would go into his room and puzzle it out and try to figure out the best way to explain it. that gives the keys to his rhetorical gifts. and when we came to congress, he taught many things to himself. he had an anecdote to every possible situation. and an incredible memory. and an incredible sense of humor. and he used jokes constantly to deflect attention from things that he wanted to pass by. and also to entertain himself. there was someone who met with him often in the white house
9:55 pm
during the civil war, and got frustrated with the anecdotes and the jokes, and lincoln told him, look, i have to do this, or i will go insane. given the pressures he was under in the civil war. that's a little about him personally. and i want to hit four points about the content of the statesmanship and what he achieved. a little about of how, what of lincoln. there are four key things. one, he was utterally devoted to this nation. he said, i never had a sentiment that did not spring from the declaration of independence. and truth be told that's hard and tough on george the iii. and i say when george iii went mad, the first dillusion he had
9:56 pm
was he was george washington. like thinking you are dick cheney. there are three key sentences to the declaration that i think are key to understanding lincoln and this country. at the beginning. i wonder if i can have a volunteer to come up and read these three sentences, please. yeah, will your voice will be deep and resonate as wills? you have to read it like you mean it. >> we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal. they are endowed by the creator with certainly and inalienable
9:57 pm
rights. among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. of these rights government is developed by men and any form of government is destructive to these ends. it's the right of the people to alter or to abolish and to lay new government on its principles and the powers. after then they must seem likely for their safety and happiness. thank you. [applause] >> all right, so that's it, right there. in three sentences that represents the summit of human wisdom about the purposes of government. what do those three sentences say? very simple things. one, we get our rights from our creator. we don't get it from government. our rights exist prior to
9:58 pm
government and we own them as a right of natural law. two, the purpose of government is to protect those rights. and three, if government fails in protecting those rights, it loses its legitimatacy and there is the right to stage a revolution. now this passage is a direct steal from john locke, the most major of american philosophers that set out the basis for commercial capitalism as we know it. and if you want to go further back from that, this passage relys on genesis. if we are truly made in the image of god, this is what government should do and should be. now what did the declaration mean for lincoln? for him it meant that the theory of our government is universal freedom. and you cannot have slavery or
9:59 pm
coercive dependence on one man on another. he says that no one can lead without that consent. i say this is the sheet anger of the american politicalism. and lincoln used this as a weapon in the political battle. he believed in my view that the democrats had turned their back on the declaration. they had turned their back on the immortal words of the founder of their own party. because they wanted to defend and accommodate slavery. and you cannot defend the declaration of independence and defend slavery. if you are pro-slaver, you have to deny that all men are created equal and deny that, that
10:00 pm
includes black men. and this is the crux of the debate. . .
10:01 pm
document, and lincoln's answer as to why it is there is encapsulates gain in -- encapsulated in this statement. but all men have the coolness and capacity to introduce in june and now revolutionary document now an abstract truth common and and not -- into a revolutionary document and abstract truth for all men, and it shall be a rebuke and stumbling block for the harbingers of tyranny and oppression. in other words, they put that statement in there not for themselves, but for us and for all subsequent generations so they will constantly been called back, and that is the way lincoln used it. the second point -- lincoln
10:02 pm
thought it had a concrete expression not just in slavery but an economic advance that all should have an equal chance. if there is something which can hated behind slavery, it is economics bases. he hated the economic vision of thomas jefferson that we would all be yeoman farmers forevermore. that is the way lincoln's father lived. lincoln's father was a subsistence farmer who never lifted into anything higher, and lincoln hated him for it. he was a strange from his region was a strange -- he was estranged from his father. he once said, i was a slave, and it was to him he was referring.
10:03 pm
lincoln became a lawyer, and we tend to think of lawyers as peres said it bottom feeders, but then lawyer -- as a parasitic bottom feeder, but lawyers set out the rules of the road in the new capitalist economy, things like bankruptcy law and land title litigation. often, who did lincoln represent? he represented the real gross, who were the four most -- represented railroads, before most of -- the foremost improvement. at that time, you had the south defending themselves and the nation that they were proslavery by saying in the north now there is wage slavery puree good isn't
10:04 pm
that the same thing -- where is wage slavery. isn't that the same thing? one person said, any society has to have these people who exist to support everyone else, and lincoln's reply is, they think men are always to remain laborers, but there is no such class. the man who labored for another last year this year labours for himself and next year will hire others to labor for him. that is the dynamic of the american middle class society, and lincoln identified himself with aspirations. their arlington supporters who came to the debate with a sign an -- there are supporters who came to the debate with signs, and lincoln realized if you're
10:05 pm
going to make it possible for people to rise in our society, you have to have a sophisticated economic systems of people have access to capital. you have to have an industrial society with transportation, and you have to slowly stomp out and aristocratic system fundamentally based on hierarchy. lincoln secretary of state famously used a phrase that we had irrepressible conflict in the united states, and he did not just mean the conflict between slavery and free labor. he said the conflict fundamentally with the eternal battle between the privileged few and the underprivileged many. lincoln said what he was there to protect was the just and prosperous system that opens the way for all, gives hope for all, and improvement of conditions for all. it is hard to imagines a more
10:06 pm
succinct statement of economic life than that. 0.3 is that as conservatives, we make much of principle, -- point three is that as conservatives, we make much of principle, but we need to talk about prudence. one man says there are four elements. it is not enough to have good intentions, or liberalism would work. you are willing to have a trade- off. you see problems in society ultimately as human nature, and you have a sense of irony. you realize things are going to go wrong, and there is no straight line to glory, and in this country you have a battle
10:07 pm
between romantic politics and prudential politics, and lincoln had this challenge. people on his own side were romantic radicals. idrown, whose famous reagaa was so disastrously wrong. these are people who were heedless of their actions and consequences. lincoln was always concerned with what the outcome and would be and always realize there would be unintended consequences, and what you really need is both of these things. if you do not go from a society like the one lincoln grew up in in illinois, all those states of one. and free blacks from coming within those borders. you do not go from that -- now
10:08 pm
all those states banned free blacks from coming into their borders. you do not go from that -- then you have linkedin who ultimately agreed with where they wanted to go, but his method was to carefully put 1 foot in front of the other and see if he was going to be able to stand or not, and when he could, to be able to take the next step. he called the abolitionists the most unhandy doubles he had encountered, but ultimately, they are looking toward saigon, and they have the same goals of getting their -- towards guyana -- zion, and they have the same goals of getting there. if you take that, you get the gettysburg idea of freedom.
10:09 pm
the civil war is not about slavery, and if you believe that, you should look of the speech by the vice-president of the confederacy, who talked about the division -- the vision of the american founders and said, our government is founded on the opposite idea. its foundation rests upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man, that slavery and subordination to the superior race is natural. this new government is the first in the history of the world based on this great historical and moral truth. if you do not believe the civil war is about slavery, asked the slaves. many of them believed in the emancipation proclamation before their owners because word spread by word of mouth. as soon as you had the chance enforced, you had slaves fleeing
10:10 pm
to be free. now they were contraband, but the fact that they came to the ultimately led to their emancipation. but the other idea is that lincoln did not oppose slavery, and he did his entire life. there was a resolution to condemn and. linkedin not just dissented but puts -- lincoln not just dissented but put down his reasons. he was opposed said near the capital there was an auction block for slaves. you can see his deep humanity in his relationship with frederick douglass. douglas said lincoln was the only white man he had encountered who made him feel comfortable. after lincoln's second inaugural
10:11 pm
address, douglas was held up in line. people did not want to let him andbecause he was black, - lincoln said, what did you think about the speech? he said, it was a sacred effort. because of the emancipation, not for the first time in the united states, our military became a great source for liberation. thousands of slaves flocked to it. the front lines became great moving camps of friedman, and at the end of the war when lincoln entered bombed out in richmond, word began to spread that he was there, and you have laborers coming out. the whites of richmond were not so thrilled. they fell on their knees in front of lincoln, and he had to
10:12 pm
say, do not kneel to me. you must neil to god only and thank him for the liberty you will enjoy. we should not sugarcoat of lincoln. he has the racial attitudes of his time, but you can see slowly during his administration his mind change, and the reason it change is because blacks were able to serve in the military and served with honor. blacks made up about 9% of the military. lincoln wrote a famous letter responding to people complaining about the blacks serving in the military. he said, there are some who say they do not want to fight for blacks. that is funny, because they are willing to fight for you. lincoln's last speech at the white house, he expressed an openness to the idea of giving
10:13 pm
limited suffrage to blacks in louisiana, and there was an important man in that audience. john wilkes booth said, that means negro voting. that is last speech he will give. i will run him through. as we know, lincoln goes to see "our american cousins." the secretary of war does not want him to go. his bodyguard does not want him to go. he goes. john wilkes booth gets access to lincoln's xbox and shoots and was called and what - an act of revenge. the secretary of war said as he dies, now he belongs to the ages. that is linkedin. -- lincoln. think about this.
10:14 pm
who else do we know from american history who comes from basically an humble roots, and who has a great sense of humor, who is a kindhearted man, a talented writer who saw his principles through? anyone? all ronald reagan. if you look at rankin, his father was an chocoholic. he was not living on the frontier, and -- his father was an alcoholic. he was not living on the front here, but he hated nuclear weapons. linkedin was famous for hardening glue -- linkedin was famous -- lincoln was famous for pardoning deserters. he could not bring himself to cause mayhem and mass murder. we know reagan wrote his own radio script, and of course, he
10:15 pm
had a wonderful sense of humor. one of my favorite reagan stories comes from when he was governor, and he went to the university of california. a protest broke out, and protests broke out everywhere. his adviser wanted him to avoid these demonstrators by going out a back door, and he said, i am going to walk right through them. he gets to his car, and these hippie types, dirty, unshaven, start pounding on his door and saying, we are the future, and the story goes common and and and now reagan opened the window and said, i am going to it -- the story goes, reagan opened the window and said, in that case, i am going to sell my bonds. these were deeply modest men. they are deeply grounded in
10:16 pm
then. they understood human nature. they were realists. a story goes that when a guy's wife runs away with a gardener, and a neighbor tries to comfort the sky and says, that is terrible. -- comfort this guy and says, that is terrible. he says, i was about to leave anyway. no one was more eloquent about the power of the market and innovations to lift everyone in our country. now he was a prudent statesman. he knew of his end but was willing to be flexible, and he created a great new birth of freedom not just in this country but globally and in europe now
10:17 pm
in the berlin wall fell, and after, the great flowering of freedom. the most important similarity is that they moved the nation ahead by drawing on the principles of the past. it was in the founders that they found a basis of the american future, and that founding and those principles are still under threat today. a much different threat than 150 years ago, but you have progressives running down our founders for about 100 years. the words debunking comes from progressive historians. the word debunking of the myth of george washington. if you want words to capture this attitude, you cannot do better than when woodrow wilson. he said the old political formulas do not fit the current
10:18 pm
problems. we need to get beyond the declaration of independence. that document did not mention the problems of our day. it is of no consequence to us, and a great opponent to this was calvin coolidge, who said, if anyone wishes to deny their truth or soundness, the only direction he can proceed historical is backwards to the time when there was no e. quality, no rights of the individual, regional equality, no rights of individual. -- when there was no equality, no rights of individual. you cannot have a lively commercial society if profit- making is nullified. you cannot have people getting ahead on their own if the important virtues like marriage
10:19 pm
and self discipline and work are washing away, and you cannot have labor have the dignity it deserves if you have people on the right and left saying there are jobs americans will not do, so i think we are in a monumental conflict in this country. i think we need a linkedin or -- or reaganesque revival. i have seen all we have done to fight back over the last two years, and it is so important. it is -- lincoln said in 1861, the struggle of today is not all for today. it is for a vast future also, and that is just as true now. lincoln gave a speech as a young
10:20 pm
man, where he talked about even back then, the united states was impregnable to military assault. he said you can take all the armies in the world, combined them, give all the wealth and the world, the greatest genius to lead them, and that army could not make a tract in the blue ridge mountains by force, but he went on to say if destruction be our lives, we must be its author and finisher. as a nation of three men, and we must live for all time or die by suicide. i think what we should do as conservatives and americans is to resolve to live. thank you very much. [no [applause]
10:21 pm
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [applause] >> thank you, thank you very much. questions? by the way, i should have said right at the beginning, i recently got married, so i am now just -- [applause] i am just now getting used to being wrong about everything. i think the married men in the audience may appreciate that joke. they may be smiling, but they are crying on inside. >> i am the member of the national journalism center. i agree with both of your analysis about president abraham lincoln. one question would be how do you look at his suspension of
10:22 pm
habeas corpus in maryland? that would be one thing that would contradict now the declaration of independence, but it might have been to preserve the unit -- union. >> you can suspended during an insurrection, but at the beginning, he suspended on his own. there was an argument about whether you needed congress to do it. he put a bunch of measures on his own authority and now that were extralegal. he takes them to congress and said, please bless these, and they've let them all except -- they bless the molex of the suspension of habeas corpus, and it was the right now -- let them all except the suspension of habeas corpus. it was the right decision,
10:23 pm
because the capital could have collapsed. you have in baltimore and near insurrection situation. you have them saying, do not send the troops through maryland at all, and lincoln said, they are not moles. they cannot go under maryland. he suspend the writ of habeas corpus first on that eastern area. i think of it as a necessary wartime measure. he goes on to suspend habeas corpus, and it was abused. a lot of the arrests had to do with incidents that were genuinely in gorilla warfare or real resistance to the draft, but it was abused. there is no doubt about it. you would say that is a mark against him, but people calling him a tyrant is going on way too far, because if you were a tyrant, you would not have an election.
10:24 pm
they had an election in 1864 he thought he was going to lose, but they still had the election. his ultimate goal was to save the country, and preserve the union, and saved freedom. if you look at confederacy's common -- at the confederacy, they are not libertarians. you are laughing. i do not know if you are laughing with the region. >> my question is about your anecdotes about reagan and the parking garage. the u.s. credit rating got downgraded from triple a, so what does that mean for our future? >> sell your bonds. >> what if we do not have anything to sell? >> it is extremely disturbing. i imagine it was s&p that
10:25 pm
downgraded us. they forecasted this. this goes back to something you have probably heard all week, the debt yield. we were talking about this over dinner, and the debt yield manifestly is inadequate. it is ridiculously inadequate. the reason i support it is there is no alternative, given the correlation of forces in washington, so i think you need a republican senate. you need a republican president, and then you're going to take care of this problem. the thing that is scary, is only dawning at me that it could be true is that what if we do not have another two years? that is a frightening prospect, and if you have europe showing off the cliff with their debt, since the financial system is so interconnected, we could go into a recession again. if we go into recession again, all these numbers will be much
10:26 pm
worse, and you have the financial system shaken to its core again, so it is a frightening and perilous time for the country, and the wisest means to do would be to have never gotten anywhere close to this type of situation where you are running these types of risk, but we did. >> first, i am a huge fan. i am from the university of the south in tennessee. i have another question. .et's go right to habeas you knew when you gave a speech to lincoln, -- on lincoln, that was going to happen. the abuses southerner's suffered during reconstruction is what delivered the southerners to the democratic party for so many years. we are seeing now there is a
10:27 pm
resurgence in the republican party. there are still holed out in more rural areas. you think we are going to continue to see this trend of the purging of democrats? the blue dog democrats are almost nonexistent any more. you think that is still going to be a viable option in the south? >> this is my basic take on its. if you had a corrupted social system in the south that had to be broken, and it was not broken during reconstruction. reconstruction was lifted during a corrupt deal, and they are free basically to repressed blacks and continue to deny them their rights. when that system broke, you saw the south slowly and now joining the american mainstream, joining the commercial dynamism that is
10:28 pm
the country, and that is when you saw the south become republicans, because you began to see a broad groups of people becoming middle and upper middle class and actually having to pay taxes. republicans did not rise in the south on the issue of race. fundamentally, it was the issue of the size of government and taxes, and it was the new deal coalition that was pandering in the south. you have ignorance, poor education, and not the wealthy generation you needed. you had a lot of people not making enough money to pay for the new deal, and the civil rights revolution broke the system, and i thought it was a great victory for justice, but it ended up being a great boon to the republican party. >> i absolutely agree. there are other things attached
10:29 pm
to it. people and the south are more religious, so clearly, there is more of a bonding to the social issues of the republican party, but also you have the southern economy is doing far better than belt or the sun belt, so for the long term, i wonder about these people moving into the south beginning in different cultures and a more liberal voting policy, i wonder if there's going to be a more viable option for democrats in the future, because right now, the democrat party, it is completely decimated except for florida. >> it is very interesting. we can talk about it for a long time, but the south is freer in economic terms than the rest of the country, and these
10:30 pm
stultifying hierarchies that characterize old-style now characterize places like the midwest because of union rules, and in places like the south you are able to build a more genuinely free market economy, and that is becoming the locus of industry in the united states. thank you. >> i attend stanford university in birmingham, alabama. >> do any northerners have questions? >> my question is i have always thought that the main reasons the southern states fought was not slavery but that they were under represented when the government, but slavery was a non-issue for a lot of people. >> this is obviously highly contested. do not take my word for it. i think what happened is the south dominated the federal
10:31 pm
government since the nation's founding. with the ascension of the republican party, which was an entirely northern-based party, they saw that grip slipping away. why that grip was so important to them, in my mind, is because they saw it as a threat to the expansion and ultimate exist ebs of -- existence of slavery. that's why i go and say it's ultimately an issue about slavery. and you know, lincoln said, his take on it, the south will agree to let this whole issue go away, as long as we stop saying slavery is wrong. it's kind of simplistic but i think there's something to that. wheven someone is in fundamental error -- when someone is in fundamental error, they're in denial. it's easy for me standing here to condemn the south. but if i lived in that time and
10:32 pm
i was on a plantation with a bunch of slaves, my view would be different. lincoln had a deeply humane and merciful view here, he knew the same was true of him. i believe slaves were constituted the greatest source of wealth in this country. so eliminating it was a huge and difficult deal. so anyway, all that is a way of saying, my view of it is that slavery is ultimately the issue but i don't want to get too much on my high horse about it and there are people who disagree with me even in the city of birmingham, alabama, i would imagine. >> hi, i'm from the university of cambridge and i'm a law student and wanted to ask about lincoln the lawyer. the chief justice came to cambridge a couple of years ago
10:33 pm
and gave a lecture about lincoln as a lawyer. one -- one thing he talked about was when the dred scott decision came down, lincoln was asked his reaction to it. instead of answering straight away, he went back to the law library and researched it overnight and in the morning he'd come up with an argument as to why the dred scott decision was wrong from an originalist point of view. now you see in academia a lot of debate about whether dred scott represented the original constitution or whether it was an activist decision by the chief justice at the time. i guess my question for you is, do you think dred scott did represent the u.s. constitution? or do you think it was judicial activism? >> yeah, i think it was judicial
10:34 pm
activism. i'm not a lawyer, i'm not an expert in this area, but i think lincoln gets the best of that argument. he was basically saying the founders didn't need to include blacks in the declaration and blacks had no rights we were bound to respect. lincoln looks at the founding era and says, guess what, blacks could vote in certain colonies. so they're obviously people. this is an issue that has come back to again and again, if blacks aren't people, why can't you just kill them? why isn't it legal to kill them in the south? if they're like horses, why do they get to, in certain cities, walk around free and stuff. so his view was that we had progressed since the founding and views in the 1850's were more advanced on racial matters,
10:35 pm
therefore the mounders must have been even worse than they were. lincoln's view was we had regressed. i think his view was correct he said, our patriotic world is dragged in the d -- patriotic robe is dragged in the dirt and soiled and we must purify in the blood of the revolution. those are correct words and very much a warning that in contemporary society, we tend to think things will get better. people will have more rights, we'll get freer, but it's not always true. >> thank you. >> good evening. i'm skowalski on twitter. >> that's funny i'm richlowry on
10:36 pm
twitter. >> i'm following you. liberals have bashed reagan but have backed off more recently, what can be done to prevent the reagan-obama comparison from taking place. >> it's such blatant, shameless body snatching. they hated him at the time. they thought he was a dangerous lunatic and ignoramus and he basically -- and you basically couldn't read anything in the mainstream media that said otherwise, but now they say he's main treatment and flexible. they're not strictly wrong in this. one of the points i was talking about, a statesman has to have
10:37 pm
an element of practicality and know when to be bold, know when to be a little more cautious and how he is going to get to his ultimate end and match his means to his end. that's what reagan did. there were time he is felt the correlation of force was against him and he had to take a knee and surrender. he did it on taxes in 1988. after his big tax cut, there was a revolt in congress, the deficit, helping the rich, the house was against him, the senate went south and there was no alternative. liberals point to that and say, reagan was in favor of increased taxes. which is absurd. it was entirely a tactical maneuver in being forced to give in. same thing with the soviet union. they say, reagan negotiated with gorbachev, this shows that reagan was in favor of negotiating with the enemy. yes, sometimes but he spent his entire first term not negotiating with the soviets
10:38 pm
because he wanted to build up our arms so we had the upper hand and the soviets knew we had the upper hand and wait until there was someone worth talking to, which there finally was in gorbachev. this is just a constant effort to beat this stuff back. the other person they're going to do it to is bill buckley. by the time his biographies are written by mainstream historians, he'll be a great liberal figure. they always want to engage in body snatching with our people and one reason they can do it is because they've been so squelf. the reason why everyone can accept reagan's ends is because he achieved them. we all now realize you could drive the soviet union into the ground without a major war that caused a nuclear armageddon. that's what reagan said at the time and they thought he was nuts. now even liberals can accept it
10:39 pm
and look at his zigs and s.a.g.s and make -- his -- and zags and make the case. >> hi, i've been reading the "national review" since high school. i have a question, i'll throw you a curveball first, then a softball. >> can you throw a soft curveball? a hanging curveball? >> no. so my first question, we see developing throughout conservative media, it was announced that big education is coming, glenn beck tv is focusing on the student section, what's the future for students as far as the "national review" goes? is there something exciting for us to look forward to? >> yes. >> ok, i'm wondering about it very, very soon. >> do you have ideas? >> student section would be excellent. that's what -- >> we do have a higher education
10:40 pm
blog on our website. what do you mean student section? >> i tend to go in the direction of wanting something by students, for students, that's what i was kind of going -- that's what i'd love to see. the softball is, on behalf of the tea party movement, what would you say abraham lincoln would think of the modern tea party movement today? >> well, it's very much in the spirit of the kind of civic activism you saw at the time. there's questions of ideology, i don't want to sound like too much of a woolly headed goo-goo guy, but people being involved, it's amazing and wonder to feel see so many people newly involved. and one thing i love about this
10:41 pm
in thed my -- in the middle of the 19th century, voting rates were the highest they've ever been. people would listen to the lincoln-douglas debate for three hours and want more. he gave an hour and a half speech, closely reasoned, he gave the speech, people didn't leave, they wanted more speeches. everyone on the house committee was up there on the podium, up there on the stage with him, give us more speeches, we want more speeches. you had nighttime marches with people carrying torches, the wide awakes. i thought of that when i was covering the ron johnson campaign in wisconsin. it's like we woke up, we're finally wake a awake. he would love the reverence for the founding and what lincoln believed ultimately and i think this is correct, we like to
10:42 pm
think the constitution is our ultimate protection, it's not if you lose the people. public sentiment and public opinion is everything. that's why you need people involved and engaged with every fiber of their being and need to be pushing on all fronts to change public opinion and shift the center of public opinion. that's why you're mentioning andrew and big education and glen beck. we need everyone pushing on all fonts. some of the people that do think the "national review" would never do because of our nature of the publication, but it's all for the good. if you can save our country and our founder's principles, you need everyone going on all cylinders. >> chuck carlson, university of san diego. i was hoping you could comment on the creation of west virginia with reference to the article 4, section 3. >> you got me. i think west virginia is even
10:43 pm
more problematic than habeas corpus. do we have west virginians in the rhyme? your state never should have existed. the creation of your state was constitutionally dubious. he was desperate to get support in the border areas that he thought was so important and you had virginia in a state of revolt and you can't really have a legitimate government of virginia to work with, so you worked with a rough government. but in terms of constitutional nicities, it's probably difficult to defend. i've never gotten the west virginia question before. >> my question is this, you make a call to return to lincoln, but this is a question that i don't hear many people dealing with. do you think lincoln was right
10:44 pm
when he said that as long as blacks and whites remain among each other, that one would be superior and the other would be inferior and that as long as we remain integrated that both would suffer? >> yeah, um, no i don't. one of the worst moments of his presidency, he had the meeting in the white house, the first time actually i think blacks had been invited into the white house to urge them to leave the country. and it was a lifelong advocate of colonyization, voluntary colonyization for what that's worth but his view for the longest time if you're in fare of colonyization, you believe blacks are alien in this country and are an alien body that should be rejected. and i think his view, though, began to change for some of the reasons i talked about in the speech which is blacks began to
10:45 pm
serve this country. and you know, the 1850's were a huge time of immigration. i'm sure it was true then because thomas seoul says it's true now. he doesn't like the phrase african-americans because he said african-americans have been in this country longer than most european americans. so lincoln's view in that matter was fundamentally wrong. all i can say in his defense is that it seems he was slowly changing over time. if you look at the lincoln-douglas debates, you'll see he does change his tone depending on where he is. illinois was a little bit of a microcome, the north was settled by new england, very yankee, very puritan and the south settled by slave owners and depending on where the debates were, he changed his tone.
10:46 pm
i think if you read it all closely, he never gave away the fundamental principle that blacks were equal to whites. he was just very cautious in the way he said it. let me ask you one question. are you familiar with the book "forced to glory"? >> yes, i am. >> i knew it. >> i read a lot of books, though. >> no, it's not an accusation. it's a book that makes the case that lincoln fundamentally shared the racism of american society and was really pulled kicking and screaming and very uncomfortably to doing what he did. would you -- >> that's accurate. >> thank you very much. >> i'm brendan, i go to college in buffalo, new york. lately, northeastern states have fall ton democratic hands in
10:47 pm
elections. given their struggles, i feel like they'll transition into republican states but do you feel that a nomination of a presidential candidate like chrisie of new jersey would help hasten that process and help them more quickly transition into republican states? >> well, i wish i could share your optimism about the northeast. but it has been -- you have pat too mi, the senator of pennsylvania, she's amazing. scott brown a little bit off the reservation but to have a republican as a senator in massachusetts and chris kristie. -- chris isaak tee. -- chris cristie. you have the labor-dominated model breaking down, and you see a democrat like andrew cuomo trying to fix it in new york. maybe i shouldn't be so
10:48 pm
pessimistic. ideally, yes, i'd want a presidential candidate who is not a southerner. i think there's a little too much of a southern iteration to republican party and someone like christie from the northeast who is a little bit different or someone from the midwest or upper midwest but you know, he's likely not going to run and our candidate from the upper midwest is not doing so great so it's a very -- do you have any favorites in the field? >> not a northeasterner but john huntsman. >> uh-oh. are you a republican? >> i'm running for my hometown's board of education, so sometimes i wonder. >> i'm teasing but when we -- i was away on my honeymoon we went on a bike trip in tuscanny and the first time i met a huntsman
10:49 pm
supporter was on this bike trip in tuscanny, i wouldn't ever meet one in iowa but in tuscanny you can find them. she was a moderate democrat from connecticut. i think that's huntsman's state and that's a big problem if you're running for a republican nomination. >> i just thought his knowledge of china was helpful to him given the recent demographic there. >> thank you very much. yes, sir. >> i'm joe shaver i'm with the national journalism center internship program. >> excellent. >> i see a greing influence of libertarians in the republican party and i know that many libertarians have a problem with lincoln. how do you think that we should address libertarians and in regard to lincoln or just in general? >> well, they're an important element of contemporary conservatism. buckley, one of his last books
10:50 pm
or last collections, referred to himself as a libertarian journalist in the title. so i think in terms of practical politics, though, you really need all three legs of the conservative stool. you need the economic libertarianism, free market orientation, social conservatives and national security hawks. another thing i've found extremely heartening about the tea party is it really, the hawkish foreign policy maybe as an exception but the libertarianism and social conservatism are fused and merged. i'm sure there are pro-choice tea partier, but i've never met one. certainly the major tea party candidates have been pro-life. so i think if you tilt too far in the libertarian direction and ignore those issues or kick them
10:51 pm
overboard, you're going to split the coalition. so on a practical level, i think you need both. look, libertarians, i don't think they have anywhere to go. there was some notion in the bush administration, which is so disappointing, that libertarians could form an alliance with liberals and you see what we get when liberals have unified control of the government. we had it over the last few years. you get historic expansion of government. so i wouldn't be worried about libertarians splitting off. i wouldn't go too far in adopting a lot of their views on social issues. but i would acknowledge their importance and frankly acknowledge if they had gotten their way over the last 10 years, we wouldn't be in this problem we were talking about earlier about getting our debt downgraded. does that answer your question? >> yes. >> thank you, everyone.
10:52 pm
[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. >> tomorrow, cnn legal analyst jeffrey toobin and former npr ombudsman alicia shepard talk about media and the courts. live from the newseum at 10:45 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> i'm not for changing the system just so we can feel good by having voter turnout which may ultimately approximate what they have in australia, which is about 97%. voter turnout per se doesn't mean much in terms of the health of the democracy. some of those vicious dictatorships in the world get voter turnout of 95% to 99% when they hold elections. >> voting is a responsible act and if i'm uninformed, haven't
10:53 pm
had the time, i shouldn't be coerced to make a decision which is life and death for many people. >> monday and tuesday on c-span, ralph nader and the center for the study of responsive law host a series of debates looking at controversial topics. monday, looking at mandatory voting, and tuesday, professors from georgetown and the university of massachusetts on taxing stock trades, derivatives and currencies. debating the controversial, monday and tuesday at 6:00 p.m. easternen on c-span. >> today on "washington journal" we talked with a reporter based in kabul about the shooting down of the u.s. army helicopter saturday that killed 30 u.s. troops and eight afghans. the president in moments. the thing we're focusing on. pictures from afghanistan and some headlines including the
10:54 pm
l.a. times and this from the denver l.a. post. worse day for the u.s. is the headline and from the orange country register. 38 dead including the e let navy seal team. covering the story for the los angeles times she's kabul, afghanistan. thanks for being with us. what can you tell us what happened friday the death toll and is the taliban responsible? caller: that focus remains unchanged. the claiming responsibility for the downing of this helicopter, but military officials say that is probable but not conclusively established so that's where it stands a the this point. host: we know these are member of what is viewed as elite navy seal team. the same unit responsible for the killing of bin laden but not
10:55 pm
the same team? caller: right. not the same individuals. ho host what happens as best you can tell on this sunday morning caller: well these night raids of the type that took place when this occurred happened almost every night. sometimes several times a night. elite troops of why value targets and often go to a remote area like this one and this time it seems the insurgents might have been tipped off and were waiting for them. host: many expressed sorrow and sadness but this is an issue brought to the male tear over the years trying to get an end to the air raid. have you had reaction from the afghan government? >> not any further beyond mr. karzai's statement but this is a
10:56 pm
very serious on-going issue and he's called on a number of occasions for these night raids to be stopped and nato did not go along with that request. it's something that's probably going to continue to be an issue. we don't know whether at this point there were most or more raids last night. seems particularly it would be out of commission for some time, although it's a large unit and they do have the capacity to continue with this policy if they want to >> in the reporting over the last 24-hours we're reading where fusion cells what are they and how are information being transmitd to potential terrorists that may want to harm u.s. troop? caller: that's not really something i've been following from here. host: information readily
10:57 pm
available to people on the ground that want to harm the u.s.? caller: information in terms of the movement office american forces? host: yes. caller: certainly there is the insurgency. one of the great strings is the huge network of human intelligence and it's ability to follow movement even in very remote areas. perhaps especially in remote areas. host: laura king of the l.a. times. afghan correspondent from kabul. will the incident and tragedy change how the helicopters are operated or the u.s. military transports soldier? caller: well that willing among the commanders and troops here are very dependent upon helicopters because of the terrain and long distances.
10:58 pm
it's not practical to use ground transport exclusively so hell cap tears helicopters are a big part of the transportation around the country. host: thanks for being with us on this sunday morning. aller: ththanks for having >> tomorrow on "washington journal," the impact of the u.s. credit rating on asian and european markets and how wall street will react. the human resource editor jason mattera looks at more impacts. and we begin a week-long look at
10:59 pm
work force training and government initiative programs. "washington journal" live at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. next, "q&a," with alyona minkovski. next, a memorial for norwegian memorial service. then another chance to see rich lowry at the young american student conference. >> we have live coverage on the senate on c-span2. >> you can watch live on >> or see them whenever you want >> or see them whenever you want at


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on